linux-kernel - Re: bcachefs: suspicious mm pointer in struct dio

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <hrx6kaqeyqdchmv24xivrooyimackqx5mxm6vlvj3y5gusxgno@gjsbtm76unrs>
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2024 16:58:14 -0500
From: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...ux.dev>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc: Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>, linux-bcachefs@...r.kernel.org, 
	kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>, 
	io-uring <io-uring@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: bcachefs: suspicious mm pointer in struct dio_write

On Wed, Nov 27, 2024 at 02:51:26PM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 27, 2024 at 2:27?PM Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...ux.dev> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 27, 2024 at 02:16:24PM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > > I'd argue the fact that you are using an mm from a different process
> > > without grabbing a reference is the wrinkle. I just don't think it's a
> > > problem right now, but it could be... aio is tied to the mm because of
> > > how it does completions, potentially, and hence needs this exit_aio()
> > > hack because of that. aio also doesn't care, because it doesn't care
> > > about blocking - it'll happily block during issue.
> >
> > I'm not trying to debate who's bug it is, I'm just checking if I need to
> > backport a security fix.
> 
> Not trying to place blame.
> 
> > > > Jens, is it really FMODE_NOWAIT that controls whether we can hit this? A
> > > > very cursory glance leads me to suspect "no", it seems like this is a
> > > > bug if io_uring is allowed on bcachefs at all.
> > >
> > > I just looked at bcachefs dio writes, which look to be the only case of
> > > this. And yes, for writes, if FMODE_NOWAIT isn't set, then io-wq is
> > > always involved for the IO.
> >
> > Ok, sounds like we're in the clear. I already started writing the
> > patch, so it'll just be a "now we can turn on FMODE_NOWAIT" instead of
> > a bugfix.
> 
> That sounds good - and FMODE_NOWAIT will be a good addition. It'll make
> RWF_NOWAIT work, and things like io_uring will also work better as it
> won't need to needlessly punt to an io-wq worker to complete this IO.
> 
> > By the way, did the lifetime issue that was causing umount/remount to
> > fail ever get resolved? I've currently got no test coverage for
> > io_uring, would be nice to flip that back on.
> 
> Nope, I do have an updated branch since then, but it's still sitting
> waiting on getting a bit more love. I suspect it'll be done for 6.14.

Alright - if you want to ping me when that's ready, along with any other
knobs I should flip on for io_uring support, I'll flip io_uring back on
in my test infrastructure at that time.